Kiran Kumar @ M K Kiran vs R Ramamurthy & Anr

The appellant is the claimant. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in judgment and award dated 2.9.2011 made in MVC No.6496/2010 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (for short ''Tribunal''), he has filed this appeal seeking for enhancement of compensation.

The appellant filed a claim petition contending that on 29.9.2010 at about 5.30 p.m. when he was standing near bus stop at Mahadevapura waiting for a bus, a tanker lorry bearing Registration No.KA-19/AA-2233 came from Kunigal towards Bangalore in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the appellant. Due to that, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries all over the body. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to Mathrushree Hospital at Nelamangala, wherein he took treatment. In view of the injuries sustained, he has suffered permanent disability. Prior to the accident, he was working as an agriculturist and earning Rs.5,000/- per month. The offending lorry was insured with the 2nd respondent. Hence, respondents are liable to compensate the claimant of Rs.10,00,000/-.

In response to the notice issued by the Tribunal, the Insurance Company filed written statement and defended the case. The owner of tanker lorry had remained unrepresented.

After trial, the Tribunal held that due to actionable negligence on the part of the driver of tanker lorry, the accident had occurred. Hence, the claimant is entitled for compensation.

With regard to quantum of compensation is concerned, in the accident, claimant has sustained fracture of traverse process L-4 and L-5, left S-1 joint fracture and abrasion over back. The doctor, who treated the claimant, assessed the disability to an extent

of 35% to the whole body. Taking into consideration of non-sensation of L-5, injuries to bowel and bladder and fracture of traverse process L-4 and L-5, the Tribunal awarded Rs.35,000/- towards ''pain and sufferings'', Rs.1,26,600/- towards ''medical expenses'', Rs.9,000/- towards ''loss of earnings'', Rs.5,000/- towards conveyance, attendant and nourishment and Rs.20,000/- towards ''loss of amenities in life''. In all, a sum of Rs.1,95,600/- with interest at 6% p.a. Since the insurance policy was in force as on the date of accident, liability was fastened on the Insurance Company to compensate the claimant. The claimant being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation has filed this appeal.

Sri Shripad V Shastri, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant contended that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is too meager. In the accident, the claimant has sustained fracture of Gr.II Listehsis, L-5 over S-1 with left foot drop, vertebral injury, involving bowel and bladder, fracture of L-4 and L-5 vertebra. He cannot do any work and has become

permanently disabled. Though the doctor assessed the disability to an extent of 35% to the whole body, no compensation has been awarded towards future loss of income. Hence, learned Advocate sought for enhancement of compensation.

On the other hand, Sri R Rajagopalan, learned Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 argued in support of the judgment and award and contended that the Tribunal has awarded just and fair compensation for the injuries sustained by the claimant and sought for dismissal of the appeal.

I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused oral and documentary evidence let in by the parties.

The occurrence of accident and the injuries sustained by the claimant due to actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle are not in dispute. The dispute is only with regard to quantum of compensation and non-awarding of future loss of

income. The claimant was aged about 19 years at the time of accident. Prior to the accident, he was doing agricultural work. The doctor, who treated the claimant, assessed the disability to an extent of 35% to the whole body. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards ''future loss of income''. No document was produced showing the income of Rs.5,000/- per month. Hence, it is appropriate to consider the income of the claimant as Rs.4,000/- per month, taking the disability to an extent of 35% to the whole body and applying the multiplier ''18'' considering the age of the claimant as 19 years as on the date of accident, he is entitled for Rs.3,02,400/- towards ''future loss of income''. Claimant has sustained three fractures. Even after six years of injuries sustained, he has not yet been recovered. Therefore, Rs.35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''pain and suffering'' is on the lower side. Hence, it is appropriate to award a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards ''pain and sufferings'' in addition to a sum of Rs.35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the said head. Further, claimant has to

live the remaining life with the disability to an extent of 35%. Therefore, Rs.20,000/- awarded towards ''loss of amenities in life'' is on the lower side. Hence, it is appropriate to award a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards the said head in addition to sum of Rs.20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, taking into consideration the income of the claimant as Rs.3,000/- per month, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.9,000/- towards ''loss of income during the laid up period'' is on the lower side. The claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.3,000/- in addition to Rs.9,000/- awarded towards ''loss of income during the laid up period''. Hence, he is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.3,50,400/- with interest at 6% p.a in addition to a sum of Rs.1,95,600/- awarded by the Tribunal. In all, claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.5,46,000/- with interest at 6% p.a.